From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E48CCC2BA19 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 07:46:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6B8A20771 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 07:46:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2635299AbgDOHqO (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 03:46:14 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:43853 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2635276AbgDOHpU (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2020 03:45:20 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 95C4B68BFE; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 09:45:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 09:45:14 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Alexander Viro , Jeremy Kerr , "Eric W . Biederman" , linuxppc-dev , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] binfmt_elf: open code copy_siginfo_to_user to kernelspace buffer Message-ID: <20200415074514.GA1393@lst.de> References: <20200414070142.288696-1-hch@lst.de> <20200414070142.288696-5-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:15:09PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > I don't think you are changing the behavior here, but I still wonder if it > is in fact correct for x32: is in_x32_syscall() true here when dumping an > x32 compat elf process, or should this rather be set according to which > binfmt_elf copy is being used? The infrastructure cold enable that, although it would require more arch hooks I think. I'd rather keep it out of this series and to an interested party. Then again x32 doesn't seem to have a whole lot of interested parties.. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC755C3815B for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 07:47:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FD1220768 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 07:47:51 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3FD1220768 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492Dwj0ZzJzDr42 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:47:49 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=lst.de (client-ip=213.95.11.211; helo=verein.lst.de; envelope-from=hch@lst.de; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 492Dss4Q3gzDr39 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:45:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 95C4B68BFE; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 09:45:14 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 09:45:14 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] binfmt_elf: open code copy_siginfo_to_user to kernelspace buffer Message-ID: <20200415074514.GA1393@lst.de> References: <20200414070142.288696-1-hch@lst.de> <20200414070142.288696-5-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Alexander Viro , Jeremy Kerr , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev , Christoph Hellwig , "Eric W . Biederman" Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:15:09PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > I don't think you are changing the behavior here, but I still wonder if it > is in fact correct for x32: is in_x32_syscall() true here when dumping an > x32 compat elf process, or should this rather be set according to which > binfmt_elf copy is being used? The infrastructure cold enable that, although it would require more arch hooks I think. I'd rather keep it out of this series and to an interested party. Then again x32 doesn't seem to have a whole lot of interested parties..